making someone redundant because of language

[mcgrubso]

I'm thinking about getting rid of someone to hire someone else who is bilingual (and will be able to deal with clients in 2 countries).

I'm wondering if this is a dodgy thing to do and if they would have a case for unfair dismissal.

Any thoughts on that?

Thanks.

 

[Lucan Unlordly]

Je ne pense pas que vous pouvez rendre quelqu'un redondantes sur les motifs de leur sexualité?

 

[Ben8472]

Why don't you offer the employee the chance to learn additional languages?

Perhaps pay for a course? I would recommend Rosetta Stone.

I do find what you are proposing quite distasteful I have to admit.

You employed a person based on a list of requirements, you are now radically changing those requirements and you propose to simply disregard that person and seek a replacement?

In my opinion I think the employee should be given the opportunity to learn a new language (paid for by you).

I have no idea where you stand legally, someone else will advise on this.

Out of interest what happens when you sign up a new client and they speak yet another language and your new employee doesn't know it?

Oh i know! You replace them with someone else who speaks 4-5 languages and will communicate in all of them for the same salary!

Obviously.

Lovely...

Ben

 

[mcgrubso]

I agree it's not very nice. That sort of thing never is.

We're currently unable to offer support to about a third of our client base in their native language though (and that wasn't the case when this person started) and I'm aware that it would add a good amount of value to our service.

 

[Deleted member 3454]

I'm thinking about getting rid of someone to hire someone else who is bilingual (and will be able to deal with clients in 2 countries).

I'm wondering if this is a dodgy thing to do and if they would have a case for unfair dismissal.

Any thoughts on that?

Thanks.

I'm no legal expert but I do know that when someone is made redundant it is their JOB that is redundant, not the individual. If the job has changed since they were employed then they should, IMHO, be given the opportunity to meet the new job requirements through training, at the employer's expense.

 

[immuneituk]

I have no idea whether you can do this easily but I have to say the idea of learning a language in order to be fluent on the phone is going to take at least a year so not a realistic option.

You might just have to employ another person?

 

[mcgrubso]

Learning a language takes years though; it's not like sending someone on an excell course or something (though maybe it is the same, legally speaking).

 

[Mr H]

I'm wondering if this is a dodgy thing to do and if they would have a case for unfair dismissal.

Yes ACAS will bend you over & **** you....

 

[matt seymour]

Yes ACAS will bend you over & **** you....

And rightly so in my opinion.

 

[HFServices]

And rightly so in my opinion.

I agree 100%

 

[Arhob1]

To be in a minority of one in this thread here is my pennysworth...

It is completely unrealistic to be expected to train someone to be fluent in a language without them living and breathing that language for a year or so.... even longer if they need to be able to talk technical jargon. If you can afford to do that then great.

Mean while in the real world if half your staff earn more than you as a struggling business owner then you have to be more pragmatic. I would say the original job role is redundant as it is now fundamentally different in the skillset required and realistically training is not going to bridge the gap. I would make that role redundant and advertise the new role. The current incumbent can apply alongside other applicants if they feel they do actually have the skillset... which they don't Though do discuss this with them and give them opportunities to come up with alternative solutions, maybe a job share or some such which actually might suit them and you better.

 

[CompactCleaning]

Question: Well if it's a third maybe you could make them part time i.e. english speaker 9-1 bilingal 1-5 or something but have a divert linked up to a phone the bilingal person carries at your expense which the english speaker can divert people to if they need help?

Just an idea.


Howard

 

[JohnnyCash]

Question: Well if it's a third maybe you could make them part time i.e. english speaker 9-1 bilingal 1-5 or something but have a divert linked up to a phone the bilingal person carries at your expense which the english speaker can divert people to if they need help?

Just an idea.


Howard

Why would he want to take on all the expense of that when he could just get rid of the person and get someone who can do the job properly...

Its laughable that people are saying "teach them a language". Its one thing to be able to stutter through ordering a bottle of red wine while you're in Spain for a week, its another altogether to converse with a complaining client shouting and screaming down the phone!

 

[Billmccallum]

To be in a minority of one in this thread here is my pennysworth...

It is completely unrealistic to be expected to train someone to be fluent in a language without them living and breathing that language for a year or so.... even longer if they need to be able to talk technical jargon. If you can afford to do that then great.

Mean while in the real world if half your staff earn more than you as a struggling business owner then you have to be more pragmatic. I would say the original job role is redundant as it is now fundamentally different in the skillset required and realistically training is not going to bridge the gap. I would make that role redundant and advertise the new role. The current incumbent can apply alongside other applicants if they feel they do actually have the skillset... which they don't Though do discuss this with them and give them opportunities to come up with alternative solutions, maybe a job share or some such which actually might suit them and you better.

This is probably the best piece of advice on the subject.

As someone who has been made redundant twice, I know how difficult it can be, but in terms of doing what's best for the business, it has to be done.

 

[maxine]

I agree if it is what the business needs then needs to be done.

 

[Podge]

I'm an employee and all in favour of training, however I can see that training an employee in a new language is a step too far.

 

[buyingbureau]

Building on CompactCleaning's idea I imagine there are multi lingual shared user call centres to support all those international e-shop businesses customer queries. A subscription to such a service might be feasible if your international business picks up. It would also give you band width for those hard to cover languages such as Finnish and Hungarian. Failing that, battle on with email and Google translator.